In my humble opinion (and this is not legal advice), with a few
dramatic and severe exceptions (for example, child pornography) if you
are an American citizen, you can record just about any damn thing you
want in your home, at least once. You don't need the AHRA to do this.
Copyright law won't hold you back. Copyright law wilts in the face of
your most fundamental Constitutional freedoms. We want every citizen
to have access to what is going on in this culture, to freely
associate with one another, to share ideas, to be able to act with
autonomy and privacy. That's the way it is and the way it's always
been. Our freedom is more important than worrying about if a few poor
souls didn't get their theoretical, speculative $1.50. And yes, that
$1.50 is very speculative. Come on, use some common sense. You can
copy your mom's old mickey mouse club record or your niece's spice
girls album in your home. That's the way it was before the AHRA, the
way it is now, and the way it will always be.
And no, recording someone else's CD in your own home is not in and of
itself commercial activity. Receiving a gift is not commercial
activity. Inheriting money from your rich uncle is not commercial
activity. There are TONS of things which increase you assets which
are not commercial activity.
Why do you think they had to make a law called the American Home
Recording Act in the first place? Because the copyright laws, if not
interpreted in full view of the Constitution, left open the
possibility of serious violations of your Constitutional rights. Look
at the name, it says it all, in America, you are free to make home
recordings. Period. You are, you were, you will be. It's THE
AMERICAN HOME RECORDING ACT, PEOPLE.
Congress could not have passed the AHRA if you weren't always allowed
to make such recordings under the Constitution in the first place,
because the Constitution didn't change, and the ultimate source of
copyright law is the Constitution. The AHRA is not a Godsend, it's a
ripoff. Your right to make such recordings (including those of other
people's CDs) for your listening pleasure in your own home trumps
copyright law. It ain't a close call, folks. Yet now the recording
industry gets more of your money for some reason.
Isn't anybody mad about that?
Damn.
Regards to the list, Steve
On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:56:35 -0500, in you wrote:
>"Magic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> So, you can't prosecute me for owning or using a minidisc recorder
>> or blank discs for non-commercial actions. As a commercial action is
>> one where assets increase, any action with the device which
>> increases my assets can be taken as "commercial".
>>
>> If I copy your CD, I now own a copy of music I did not previously
>> own. This has increased my assets.
>
>I'm not a lawyer and I try not to play one on the 'net, so I could
>really use the help of a lawyer for a moment.
>
>Matt, I fear you have stretched the definition of "commercial" way
>beyond reasonable bounds. We all know what "commercial" means, and
>home recording is not a commercial endeavor no matter how many MDs I
>record from friends, so long as I do not start selling them. Please
>don't start stretching terms, or the whole discussion will break
>down. We owe it to each other to stick with canonical definitions.
>
>Thanks,
>Rick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
